It’s not only the spec-api stuff. There are also many other things like xbean, geronimo-jta, javamail, etc. It’s basically a commons-EE atm.
If you talk about a reboot then I wonder what you had in mind. There is TomEE which takes the really lightweight approach. And having two implementations providing the same doesn’t make sense. At least not if there are exactly the same people involved… Should the Geronimo-Server focus on OSGi? That is what made the big difference so far. No clue otherwise. LieGrue, strub > Am 07.04.2015 um 08:10 schrieb Alan D. Cabrera <l...@toolazydogs.com>: > > I agree, we should start moving our focus. > > When you speak of #2, what bits do you speak of? The glue that assembles the > various JSR implementations of the JEE spec? > > I wonder if we should start a total re-write. We’ve learned a thing or two > since this project started and the current Zeitgeist for server software has > moved on. > > I think it’s an exciting time to take a fresh look at Geronimo and to > “re-imagine” it. If you all agree, what to keep and what to re-write? > > > Regards, > Alan > >> On Apr 6, 2015, at 7:50 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: >> >> Txs Alan! >> >> >> I think we should probably move our focus finally? The Geronimo project >> basically consists of 2 different things. >> 1.) the Geronimo EE server >> 2.) all the rest ;) >> >> 2 is doing really fine. 1 is worrying. Or are there any significant people >> interested in continueing with 1? >> >> Should we reflect this in the report? >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >>> Am 04.04.2015 um 20:36 schrieb Alan D. Cabrera <l...@toolazydogs.com>: >>> >>> Here's my initial draft: >>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxPMGT/Apache+Geronimo+Board+Report+-+2015-04+-+April >>> >>> If I missed something please let me know or go ahead and update the page >>> directly. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Alan >>> >> >
